Forum:One step beyond....
I propose an amendment to the 200 vote limit rule: Voting on Brickipedia is open to all with either: * 200 mainspace-edit count at Brickipedia * 200 mainspace-edit count at an official friends * 300 mainspace-edit count at other recognized projects (that way, it does not include spam or vandalism wikis) * Administrator status on an official friend of Brickipedia It stops multis/vandals, lets those who are in the know in. - cjc 15:46, April 19, 2011 (UTC) : I don't like the last one, even though it won't affect me, but it will encourage too many users who shouldn't really be admins to try any means of getting admin... --[[User:Lcawte|'Lewis Cawte']] (Talk - Contact) 16:02, April 19, 2011 (UTC) ::I'd imagine that, in-theory, all adminstrators on other sites would have 200 edits their. - cjc 16:05, April 19, 2011 (UTC) :::I like it. 17:19, April 19, 2011 (UTC) : I like this proposal, and fully agree with it. --Cligra 17:23, April 19, 2011 (UTC) *How about having it open to every one? 22:23, April 19, 2011 (UTC) *:Because people moan either way, so I'm pushing middle ground :P - cjc 22:26, April 19, 2011 (UTC) *I consider it to be completely stupid to have any kind of restriction placed on the right to vote. It's like a government saying, "You can't vote since you haven't ever been in a political position of any significance." But this is a step in the right direction, I suppose. Oh yes, and can we make this any namespace instead of the mainspace? Please...think of the template geeks! FB100Z • talk • 00:59, April 20, 2011 (UTC) **What a brilliant quote: think of the template geeks! -- all you people are vampires - cjc 07:15, April 20, 2011 (UTC) **Agree with FB100Z, we should change "mainspace" to any namespace. By the way, in many countries the government does say "You haven't been long enough here, so you don't have the right to vote". 12:40, April 20, 2011 (UTC) ***Well, U.S. has its age limit for voting. However, I agree with it to some extent, since by 18, a reasonable majority of Americans are capable of thinking for themselves. This is not the case for mainspace edit count, though. Oh, and one more thing: all this edit count stuff (which I think is a load of complete BS) reeks of editcountitis. FB100Z • talk • 23:43, April 20, 2011 (UTC) ****Pah, I'm just trying to get more people to vote, without pissing off those who disagree with the concept of all voting. -- Pandemonium is in bloom - cjc 23:54, April 20, 2011 (UTC) What is a "recognized project"? Something like Wookiepedia, etc.? If Forum:New method of community discussion/voting passes, this would be unnecessary, however, if not, I would support this. 00:45, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :I think a "recognized project" is a subjective thing, but it's fairly easy to tell what it means: basically, any wikis that are at Brickipedia's level or above in terms of activity (or something like that.) FB100Z • talk • 05:04, April 21, 2011 (UTC) * It shouldn't be 200 on any namespace, it should be 200 in certain namespaces; main, template, category ect. If it was 200 in all, you could just blog and comment and be able to vote. 08:46, May 22, 2011 (UTC) Modified amendment Voting on Brickipedia is open to all with either: * 200 edit count at Brickipedia * 200 edit count at an official friends * 300 edit count at other recognized projects (that way, it does not include spam or vandalism wikis) * Administrator status on an official friend of Brickipedia Support # Lets those who know what they are doing vote. -- Pandemonium is in bloom - cjc 00:23, April 21, 2011 (UTC) # --Cligra 00:23, April 21, 2011 (UTC) # Per everything I said above. FB100Z • talk • 00:31, April 21, 2011 (UTC) #: I'm going to keep this up until all you equal rights opponents die in the flames of Hell. FB100Z • talk • 00:31, April 21, 2011 (UTC) #::You really know how to persuade people don't you. O.O -- Pandemonium is in bloom - cjc 00:33, April 21, 2011 (UTC) #:::Well, I haven't had any formal training in debate...but let's just say I'm very opinionated ;) FB100Z • talk • 00:41, April 21, 2011 (UTC) #::::Well, you won't gain support condemning them to Hell, so it just makes you and all that can't vote look bad. -- Pandemonium is in bloom - cjc 09:53, April 21, 2011 (UTC) #:::::PR notwithstanding, it accurately represents my current attitude to both the concept of unequal rights and its advocates. Wouldn't you be just a bit miffed if your right to vote was squashed like a bug in a girls' summer camp simply because people with similar mainspace edit counts have a slight possibility of being inexperienced? FB100Z • talk • 00:57, April 22, 2011 (UTC) #::::::Slight is an understatement. #:::::::True. However, you need to realize how not having the right to vote is fundamental exclusion from the Brickipedia community. Thus, the restriction turns what used to be an open community into a cabal. The rule basically says, "You can't be part of the Elite Community Cabal until you've gone and made 200 mainspace edits, regardless of their quality or even productivity. Since the mainspace is the only namespace where edit count is in direct proportion to experience with the wiki, the other mainspaces don't have any relevance at all." FB100Z • talk • 01:18, April 27, 2011 (UTC) #::::::::That is why we are trying to solve that problem with this vote I am commenting on. The 200 edits are needed so a new user knows how a/this wiki works (every wiki works differently). And for the case that a user has enough experience from other wikis, we are setting this up. 10:56, April 28, 2011 (UTC) # 10:11, April 21, 2011 (UTC) # Why not. # 21:14, April 21, 2011 (UTC) Oppose # Just to be annoying :P I don't really see why users who don't contribute here should have an active say in our policies- they're two separate entities. Real life example- does Iceland have a say in Austria's Parliament? (picked two countries at random, just trying to illustrate a point). Sure, opinions from experienced editors would be more than welcome, and there's nothing currently against them commenting, but deciding the course of a wiki when you're not even a part of it seems a bit wrong to me. 11:04, May 2, 2011 (UTC) #: 9.9 Okay, let me explain this to you all over again. ## If one can't assist in making community decisions, s/he isn't part of the community. The current policy turns the community into an exclusive cabal. This is very, very bad. The community is an open place, where people should be free to come and go regardless of their edit count. ## The current policy is very bitey to newcomers. I won't explain that, since the reader is intelligent enough to go Google that himself. ## There seems to be some sort of superstition going about that someone with a low edit count must be a sockpuppet and/or person who isn't smart enough to reason. ## Edit counts suck canal water. #: I'm starting to get a bit frustrated; this is not the first time I've tried to explain this to you. FB100Z • talk • 00:39, May 24, 2011 (UTC) # Per Nighthawk leader (And not just to be annoying) ;) -Nerfblasterpro: [[special:contributions/Nerfblasterpro|'Can you believe it's only been a year?']] 14:35, May 3, 2011 (UTC) # Per NHL. 08:47, May 22, 2011 (UTC)